<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2018 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'My first driving experience',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<section id="pseudosecurity">
	<h2>Pseudosecurity</h2>
	<p>
		I went into the bank again, and I ended up seeing a new banker, which set me back a bit.
		The one I&apos;d talked to before was out; perhaps it was their day off or something.
		Anyway, the new banker was able to retrieve my lost user name, but they wouldn&apos;t accept the fact that I knew I was getting the same error message as before with that user name.
		I kept trying to explain that the new account didn&apos;t help, as when I tried to retrieve the user name through the website, I&apos;d get the same error as before.
		They telephoned support like the last banker did, and even though I explained no issues were found by support last time either and that the lack of visible issues this time didn&apos;t even hint that the problem <strong>*might*</strong> be fixed now, they just didn&apos;t seem to get it.
		I needed to go home and try to log in with the new user name before they&apos;d proceed any further.
	</p>
	<p>
		The wait when I got back to the bank was agonising.
		I needed to get that visit done with so I could make it to my driving lesson on time, so I started getting pretty impatient after the first twenty minutes.
		It took about forty-five total.
	</p>
	<p>
		With the testing of the new user name complete, we were able to push through further with the problem.
		I learned the bank branch will be closing in July as well, which would be relevant later.
		We spoke with another representative by telephone, and got transferred to who we really needed to speak with: the website and mobile application techs.
		Eventually, they revealed that their website maliciously discriminates against certain $a[IP] addresses.
		They never seemed to suspect a common proxy, but they thought I might be using a $a[VPN].
		I of course denied this, as I don&apos;t trust $a[VPN]s enough to use one myself; I need something much more secure.
		They revealed something interesting: some $a[ISP]s automatically route customer traffic through a $a[VPN], which the tech admitted was for security reasons.
		They then asked me to contact my $a[ISP], see if they were routing my traffic through a $a[VPN] without my knowledge, and ask them to stop.
		They&apos;d just admitted that if the $a[ISP] was doing this, it was likely for security reasons, so it gave me exactly what I needed to hold my ground and go on the offensive.
	</p>
	<p>
		It was impossible to get a word in while they tried to explain how to get the $a[ISP] to give me an insecure connection to reach the bank website over, but eventually they stopped and I was able to say what needed to be said.
		The first main point I made was that if the bank&apos;s website isn&apos;t accepting connections from secure connections, only insecure connections, I have no reason to feel safe trusting that bank with my credit.
		Secondly, trying to use $a[IP] addresses as a form of check for identity (which was the excuse the tech gave as to why they maliciously block access over $a[VPN]s) is pseudosecurity, not actual security.
		Third, if they&apos;re relying on pseudosecurity, it hints that their system doesn&apos;t have much real security to speak of.
		Fourth, every other financial institution I&apos;ve dealt with, and I listed about five, doesn&apos;t rely on such hacks; this isn&apos;t an accepted practice or any sort of actual security measure.
		I didn&apos;t seem to be able to make the tech understand that requiring that users disable a security feature to access their accounts necessarily meant the user taking risks they shouldn&apos;t have to; that this makes access to the website much <strong>*less*</strong> secure, not more.
		Between the inability to connect securely, the security flaws hinted at by the bank&apos;s reliance on pseudosecurity, the fact that I can&apos;t pay my bill online because their pseudosecurity won&apos;t let me, and the fact I won&apos; be able to pay in person soon either, I threatened to close my account, as it&apos;s soon going to be completely unusable.
		One thing led to another, and they offered the option to pay via post.
		That&apos;s obviously not an acceptable option, but I needed to at least <strong>*pretend*</strong> to go along with some of their garbage, just because of the sheer amount of garbage they were throwing at me.
		I needed to keep the resistance of their idiocy focussed on the important part of the battle, so they&apos;d have less about my use case to distract them and get them to write me off.
		I have no intent to pay via post, but I said that&apos;d work for me, and they left the line.
	</p>
	<p>
		The telephone had been on speaker the whole time, so the banker heard everything.
		They said they fully agreed with my side, and the conversation seemed to get them a bit worried about the security of the accounts themself.
		If nothing else, that alone was worth my time.
		They also claimed to think the tech understood my side and agreed as well, but the tech certainly wasn&apos;t agreeing with me.
		They held pretty tightly to their claim that using $a[IP] addresses as part of their authentication mechanism was entirely valid and helped with security.
		If they understood my side of the argument, they certainly didn&apos;t show any signs of agreeing with it.
		The banker and I talked for a bit more, and I made it clear I wasn&apos;t sure this card would do me any good if I can&apos;t access the website; I&apos;d probably cancel the card.
		They said having credit cards, even unused ones, helps with one&apos;s credit score though.
		From the sounds of it, the more unused credit you have, even if entire accounts are unused, the better off your score is.
		Apparently, they have five cards themself, four of which remain permanently untouched.
		I guess I&apos;ll keep the card around then, I&apos;ll just take it out of my wallet after I hit the \$500 $a[USD] mark to claim the reward.
		Discover has some issues, I won&apos;t lie, but for the most part, they have my back.
		I&apos;ll just pick up using my Discover card everywhere that takes it at that point.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="driving">
	<h2>Driving lesson</h2>
	<p>
		I&apos;ve found I feel like I&apos;m going to hit the curb on the right side of the vehicle even when I&apos;m actually still to far from that edge.
		Something in me expected that though.
		It&apos;s like ... the ghost of a memory or something.
		I&apos;m not sure when I&apos;ve experienced this, but this was my first time behind the wheel, so it certainly wasn&apos;t a past driving instance.
		I also put too much pressure on the peddles.
		It&apos;ll take some getting used to, but if I can fix those two issues, I think I should be able to drive alright.
		Mostly, I need experience.
	</p>
	<p>
		I practices in a parking lot at first, and didn&apos;t have any major issues there.
		My driving is terribly awkward, but again, time behind the wheel should fix this.
		When I tool to an actual street though, my instructor had me run through a loop containing two roundabouts.
		On one of them, I took the vehicle over a curb on the left side, and another time, I grazed the curb on the right.
		I&apos;m way too slow too, but at least I didn&apos;t crash or something.
		My instructor said I did well, so I must not have done as terribly as some people would.
		I&apos;m often more critical of myself than others are of me; I guess that makes sense though, as I&apos;m more critical of myself than I am of others.
		I think most reasonable people give other people more leeway than they give themselves.
	</p>
	<p>
		We&apos;ll be meeting next week to continue the lessons.
		Hopefully I&apos;ll do better then.
		I&apos;d love for this to be over with, not because it&apos;s overly terrible, but because my job is.
		I&apos;d like to be free to job seek, which I can only do once I&apos;m no longer begging for help from a coworker.
	</p>
	<p>
		I forget how it came up, but the banker I spoke with today didn&apos;t think people with driver licenses but without motor vehicles require motor vehicle insurance.
		It also came up after the lesson, and my instructor&apos;s significant other, who rode with us, didn&apos;t think so either.
		I got to hear more of the story from my instructor, and it seems their parents didn&apos;t want them getting a license until they were eighteen because they didn&apos;t want to add their child to their insurance plan.
		It sounds like a misunderstanding on the part of my instructor, and that allowing them to drive the car required them on the insurance, not that simply having a license requires it.
		I&apos;ll ask the $a[DMV] about it, I guess.
		See what they say.
		In any case, it seems I might take the driving exam right away after all.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		My discussion post for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			I&apos;m not sure biodiversity is <strong>*inherently*</strong> important.
			The issue is more one of equilibrium.
			Natural ecosystems that were unbalanced died out and gave way to new ecosystems until a balance was achieved that was stable enough to continue on it its then-current form.
			However, people are coming in and disrupting these subtle balances.
			In these hotspots, the balance found included high biodiversity.
			Therefore, to continue that balance, that same biodiversity is needed.
			Either that, or a new balance must be established, which could take millions of years.
			It&apos;s not about <strong>*how many*</strong> species are in the area, but rather <strong>*which*</strong>.
			An area that evolved to have low biodiversity isn&apos;t any less healthy than one with high biodiversity, as far as I&apos;m aware.
		</p>
		<p>
			It could be said though that biodiversity adds a measure of resistance to the negative effects of change.
			For example, if there are only five species in an area and something changes the environment in a way that one can&apos;t survive, the remaining four must fill in for the role of the lost species, a new spices must evolve, or the balance will be lost and life isn&apos;t going to do well there.
			On the other hand, with high biodiversity, losing a single species has less of an impact.
			Multiple species will fill the same ecological role for most if not all roles; the only issue then is finding a new balance of the division of resources between species.
		</p>
		<p>
			If you wanted to tie biodiversity into natural selection and evolution, natural selection and evolution (which are two sides of the same coin) does occur faster when there&apos;s a bigger selection of life to choose from.
			However, natural selection and evolution are what cause biodiversity in the first place.
			Additionally, I wouldn&apos;t say this is a reason biodiversity is important, as it assumes that evolution is, itself, important.
			This really only holds true during times just after a balance has been disrupted, as evolution can restore the ecosystem to a new balance.
			In other words, evolution is indirectly important, with ecological balance being the thing of actual importance.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
</section>
END
);
